From: Grant Callaghan (email@example.com)
Date: Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 16:17:43 GMT
>Even if Dawkins is wrong about DNA as the central actor-- as the only truly
>living (self-replicating) thing in the body-- that doesn't mean it's not
>still self-replicating. We simply find it at the base of a hierarchy of
>self-perpetuating life-forms, including organisms and species. Move the
>analogy from Dawkins, the reductionist, to Gould, the (late)
>and "memes" are at the base of a hierarchy that includes minds and
>But drop the analogy altogether and it's not memetics.
A computer virus is self-replicating, but it's not, to my mind, a life form.
DNA is not much different from the data punched into the tape of a Turing machine. Take it out of the cell and DNA has no life of its own. It makes no more sense to call DNA life than it does to call the 1s and 0s on your hard disk a computer.
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri 01 Nov 2002 - 16:21:44 GMT